Assessing prioritization of a good death across Brazil, Italy, Japan, and the United States: A psychometric evaluation.
Saved in:
| Title: | Assessing prioritization of a good death across Brazil, Italy, Japan, and the United States: A psychometric evaluation. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Clem, Sarah E. (AUTHOR), Becker, Todd D. (AUTHOR), Sacco, Paul (AUTHOR), Cagle, John G. (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Death Studies. 2026, Vol. 50 Issue 9, p1915-1925. 11p. |
| Subjects: | Attitudes toward death, Cross-sectional method, Secondary analysis, Death, Satisfaction, Research evaluation, Questionnaires, Research methodology evaluation, Ethnology research, Statistical sampling, Descriptive statistics, Population geography, Retrospective studies, Cultural values, Psychometrics, Research methodology, Spirituality, Medical records, Acquisition of data, Comparative studies, Data analysis software, Factor analysis, Values (Ethics), Evaluation |
| Geographic Terms: | Italy, United States, Japan, Brazil |
| Abstract: | Empirically vetted measures capturing individual priorities for a good death are lacking. This study assessed the measurement properties, measurement invariance, and internal consistency reliability of a prospective measure, Prioritization of a Good Death Index. We used data from a probability sample (N = 4,239) of the general public in Brazil (n = 1,233), Italy (n = 1,000), Japan (n = 1,000), and the United States (n = 1,006). We assessed aims through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), multi-group CFA, and composite reliability, coefficient H, and average variance extracted. CFA results indicated adequate fit for the full sample, χ2(14) = 174.41, p<.001 (CFI =.96, TLI =.94, RMSEA =.05, SRMR =.93), and within each country subsample. Multi-group CFA results did not support scalar invariance, indicating differing end-of-life values across country subsamples. Sufficient internal consistency reliability was achieved within each country. These initial results support the use of the Prioritization of a Good Death Index as a valid and reliable measure to assess end-of-life preferences in practice and research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Death Studies is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Empirically vetted measures capturing individual priorities for a good death are lacking. This study assessed the measurement properties, measurement invariance, and internal consistency reliability of a prospective measure, Prioritization of a Good Death Index. We used data from a probability sample (N = 4,239) of the general public in Brazil (n = 1,233), Italy (n = 1,000), Japan (n = 1,000), and the United States (n = 1,006). We assessed aims through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), multi-group CFA, and composite reliability, coefficient H, and average variance extracted. CFA results indicated adequate fit for the full sample, χ2(14) = 174.41, p<.001 (CFI =.96, TLI =.94, RMSEA =.05, SRMR =.93), and within each country subsample. Multi-group CFA results did not support scalar invariance, indicating differing end-of-life values across country subsamples. Sufficient internal consistency reliability was achieved within each country. These initial results support the use of the Prioritization of a Good Death Index as a valid and reliable measure to assess end-of-life preferences in practice and research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 07481187 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/07481187.2025.2551368 |
